The game is quite hard to learn, but with your childish attitude you'll make it worse.
There is a game that is very easy to learn and doesn't offer any challenge. It's the perfect game for impatient kids. I forgot the name... it was "Call of raging Children" or something.

Seriously, your best win rates are all on tanks of tier 1 or 2; you have a single tank with a win rate over 50% above tier 2 and that's the M3 Stuart. Since the introduction of 3/5/7, tanks of tier 3 and below only get +1 match-making so you could drop down again, the only problem with trying to learn the game in lower tiers is the amount of yolo-rush players who don't understand tactics.

You could jump back in your KV-1; that's a good tank with the upgraded turret and 85mm F-30 gun and it's got enough armour to allow you to bounce a few shots while you pick up the basics of angling your armour and moving with support. I'd avoid your KV-2 until you've picked up some more experience; it's fun to one-shot things but that tank has very little armour and is easy to shoot while it reloads.

What doesn't work in this game is rushing in and hoping for the best. That sort of tactic doesn't really work in any shooter game.

You see the half of the enemy team that are are the same tier as you? Yeah, fight them.

That hardly ever works in practice.

The other team +2 tier will destroy you. So you either have to sit in base until they are destroyed. But then your teams tier +2 are alive and will have killed or will kill everything. Or the other team destroys your tier +2 tanks and will steamroll you because nothing is alive to stop them.

Jigabachi, on 28 April 2018 - 06:24 PM, said:

The game is quite hard to learn, but with your childish attitude you'll make it worse.
There is a game that is very easy to learn and doesn't offer any challenge. It's the perfect game for impatient kids. I forgot the name... it was "Call of raging Children" or something.

It's not that hard to learn. You open your wallet, and pay for premium ammo if you want to have fun in garbage matchmaking where you are trash tier.

Strappster, on 28 April 2018 - 06:25 PM, said:

I don't think 3/5/7 is the reason your games suck.

Seriously, your best win rates are all on tanks of tier 1 or 2; you have a single tank with a win rate over 50% above tier 2 and that's the M3 Stuart. Since the introduction of 3/5/7, tanks of tier 3 and below only get +1 match-making so you could drop down again, the only problem with trying to learn the game in lower tiers is the amount of yolo-rush players who don't understand tactics.

You could jump back in your KV-1; that's a good tank with the upgraded turret and 85mm F-30 gun and it's got enough armour to allow you to bounce a few shots while you pick up the basics of angling your armour and moving with support. I'd avoid your KV-2 until you've picked up some more experience; it's fun to one-shot things but that tank has very little armour and is easy to shoot while it reloads.

What doesn't work in this game is rushing in and hoping for the best. That sort of tactic doesn't really work in any shooter game.

Do you know the difference in M3 Stuart (63% win) vs M5 Stuart (48% win)? M5 is garbage because it is ALWAYS bottom tier in the match up. I HATE this tank for this reason. Not because the tank itself is bad, but because the matchup is so bad that I can't do anything.

Tier 2 and 3 is the most fun to play because it is most balanced with no +2 garbage. But it also does not have the big tanks you want to use.

The other team +2 tier will destroy you. So you either have to sit in base until they are destroyed. But then your teams tier +2 are alive and will have killed or will kill everything. Or the other team destroys your tier +2 tanks and will steamroll you because nothing is alive to stop them.

If the +2s are killing you then you're fighting the +2s. Don't fight the +2s. Fight your own tier and support your own +2s and you'll do much better. If you can't handle tanks of even your own tier tho then problem isn't with the MM.

46% @ 1,000 games, 15% survival rate and a destruction ratio of only 0.46 ? The main fault I can see is whats between the chair and the keyboard.. blame the game its easier

Yes it's called suicide rushing when you are trash tier. I don't really care about surviving when I load in such games. I can care less about my stats. I rather finish the round and play a funnier match up.

It's not that hard to learn. You open your wallet, and pay for premium ammo if you want to have fun in garbage matchmaking where you are trash tier.

Or you actually learn to play, which also includes the lesson "how to shine when bottomtier". And the funny part is: When you know how to play, you don't need any premammo. But even if you still want to use it, you don't have to open your wallet.

All you have to do to get there is to grow up and to stop being a spoiled brat who can't even take the most simple challenge.

If the +2s are killing you then you're fighting the +2s. Don't fight the +2s. Fight your own tier and support your own +2s and you'll do much better. If you can't handle tanks of even your own tier tho then problem isn't with the MM.

I have more avg. damage in my tier 2 and tier 3 tanks than I do in my M5 Stuart because the match making is garbage.

NUKLEAR_SLUG, on 28 April 2018 - 06:39 PM, said:

If the +2s are killing you then you're fighting the +2s. Don't fight the +2s. Fight your own tier and support your own +2s and you'll do much better. If you can't handle tanks of even your own tier tho then problem isn't with the MM.

Or you actually learn to play, which also includes the lesson "how to shine when bottomtier". And the funny part is: When you know how to play, you don't need any premammo. But even if you still want to use it, you don't have to open your wallet.

All you have to do to get there is to grow up and to stop being a spoiled brat who can't even take the most simple challenge.

Paying for premium ammo is hardly a challenge. Just lol. You must be really indoctrinated if you think playing with trash tier vs +2 where you can't penetrate is called a challenge.

Imagine playing an FPS where this guy has a premium rifle that is two tiers above you. He kills you in 1 shot every time he hits. Your rifle however needs 5+ bullets to kill this guy.

Is that a challenge to you? It is unbalanced gameplay and bad game design.

I'll take your word for it, that was one of the first tank lines I played way back when so the stats are very likely poor. M5 is a scout tho, you're job is more to spot and support not do damage and were I to pick one up again that's what I'd be doing. Spotting for the team, supporting as and when the opportunity arises and very definitely wouldn't be trying to fight the +2s.

As Jigibachi said, you need to learn how to be effective even when bottom tier and you can do that just fine if you do it right. Blaming the MM and premium rounds are just excuses.

You sir, are the worst type of player that this game has. Please go away and play something else.

WoT is a very complex type of strategy shooter and one of the main points of the game is to know who you can fight how you can fight them and who you cannot fight. If it was not for that it would just be another generic shooter game.

You see the half of the enemy team that are are the same tier as you? Yeah, fight them.

This is (sadly) very common yet some of the worst advice around. If only random battles worked like a candy store where you can pick what you want. But they don't. The maps are small and the number of relevant areas that you need to win is usually 1-2. Often a lone top tier tank in the enemy team with a basic level of support is enough to rule out any viable plays from your bottom tier tank.

What you're suggesting with "fighting the low tier enemies" is basically saying that a bottom tier tank should not contest relevant areas(because the bigger enemy tanks will likely be there) and instead of that you are prioritizing fights against the enemy tanks that matter the least - the enemy low tier tanks that are far away from the important areas. You're consciously trying to make yourself as useless as possible and you're telling the others to do the same as a "solution" to the problem. You think this makes you cunning - it doesn't. *edited*

The reason why +2/-2 is [edited]ing [edited] is exactly because it puts into battles tanks that should never ever fight each other. If you think playing your own mini-game within the battle and ignoring the higher tier tanks is a solution... I don't think I can speak my mind about that without risking a ban. The point is that "avoiding the enemy high tier tanks" is as much a solution as limping instead of walking properly when you have a broken leg.

@Everyone else: Blaming the 3-5-7 template is equally pointless. Whatever problems the 3-5-7 template system has are all just symptoms of the +2/-2 matchmaking. As long as the game is mixing in tanks from 3 different tiers in each battle there's going to be severe issues with balance. The template system was added to the game because players were raging that they were being completely useless every few battles when both teams had 7-8 tier 10 tanks while you were tier 8? You remember those super fun times when you had 3 tier 10 games in a row on your tier 8 tank and there was nothing you could do against the legion of tier 10 tanks? It wasn't fun either and I remember ragequitting lots of sessions because of that. Most people seem to have jumped into the 3-5-7 hatetrain and forgotten that the matchmaking was initially changed because people hated it.

The template system just re-packaged the core problem. The core problem is that we're having tier 8 tanks and tier 10 tanks in the same battles, or tier 5 and tier 7 tanks in the same battles. As long as that isn't being addressed nothing will save us. We can keep barking at the template system but as long as the game has +2/-2 matchmaking the "fixes" are going to be just re-packaging the problem. Remember that 3-5-7 template wouldn't even be possible in a +1/-1 environment.

This is (sadly) very common yet some of the worst advice around. If only random battles worked like a candy store where you can pick what you want. But they don't. The maps are small and the number of relevant areas that you need to win is usually 1-2. Often a lone top tier tank in the enemy team with a basic level of support is enough to rule out any viable plays from your bottom tier tank.

What you're suggesting with "fighting the low tier enemies" is basically saying that a bottom tier tank should not contest relevant areas(because the bigger enemy tanks will likely be there) and instead of that you are prioritizing fights against the enemy tanks that matter the least - the enemy low tier tanks that are far away from the important areas. You're consciously trying to make yourself as useless as possible and you're telling the others to do the same as a "solution" to the problem. You think this makes you cunning - it doesn't. *edited*

I didn't say anything of the sort, I said don't fight the +2s. That doesn't mean you don't contest key areas, it means you support your own +2s to contest the key areas. If you're fighting them directly you're doing it wrong. However if there's nothing to support and you're advocating throwing away your own low tier tank purely because 'this is the place meta says I have to fight over' then that's just beyond stupid.

I didn't say anything of the sort, I said don't fight the +2s. That doesn't mean you don't contest key areas, it means you support your own +2s to contest the key areas. If you're fighting them directly you're doing it wrong. However if there's nothing to support and you're advocating throwing away your own low tier tank purely because 'this is the place meta says I have to fight over' then that's just beyond stupid.

No, you didn't say so - but in practice your advice means exactly that. When you say "don't fight the +2s" and "fight the enemy bottom tier tanks" it sounds nice in theory but it just doesn't work that way in practice. Like I said it isn't a candy store where you pick what you want and get it. In practice you don't just decide that you want the enemy bottom tiers but none of the top tiers. If you "decide" to fight the enemy bottom tiers your plan is remarkably often ruined by the enemy top tier who doesn't give a [edited] what you think.

The game has small maps and your higher tier enemies don't generally agree with your plan. Under these circumstances making plans based on you having a choice is like expecting to win money from game slots with a return rate of 95% - you are going to be losing money in the long run even if you can get lucky at times.

So which one is it? Do you play the important flanks or do you avoid the enemy top tiers? Your optimism and "I choose Pikachu" attitude doesn't change the fact that these two things mostly come as a package and you can't have one without the other. More often than not you will run into bigger enemy tanks in the important areas. There are battles when none of them show up but you have no way of knowing this up-front so you can't plan for those games.

You have to make some decision here. If you play the important areas you will usually run into the big enemy tanks without being able to pick your fights against the lower tier enemies. On the other hand if you go to the areas where you expect to be able to pick your fights without running into the big enemy tanks, you're not achieving anything more than some points of cheap damage.

Or is your idea of avoiding the big enemy tanks that you go to the important area and sit in cover with the hopes that your team's big tanks show up and do their job? Anyone who's tried this approach knows it's like the game slot example above - you just don't win often enough to make it worthwhile.

Actually you can quite freely throw away your bottom tier tank without hurting your team's chances a lot. While this isn't recommended and I suggest everyone to do their best no matter how useless their tank, the reality is that it just isn't a big deal to lose a bottom tier tank.

This is (sadly) very common yet some of the worst advice around. If only random battles worked like a candy store where you can pick what you want. But they don't. The maps are small and the number of relevant areas that you need to win is usually 1-2. Often a lone top tier tank in the enemy team with a basic level of support is enough to rule out any viable plays from your bottom tier tank.

What you're suggesting with "fighting the low tier enemies" is basically saying that a bottom tier tank should not contest relevant areas(because the bigger enemy tanks will likely be there) and instead of that you are prioritizing fights against the enemy tanks that matter the least - the enemy low tier tanks that are far away from the important areas. You're consciously trying to make yourself as useless as possible and you're telling the others to do the same as a "solution" to the problem. You think this makes you cunning - it doesn't. *edited*

The reason why +2/-2 is [edited]ing [edited] is exactly because it puts into battles tanks that should never ever fight each other. If you think playing your own mini-game within the battle and ignoring the higher tier tanks is a solution... I don't think I can speak my mind about that without risking a ban. The point is that "avoiding the enemy high tier tanks" is as much a solution as limping instead of walking properly when you have a broken leg.

@Everyone else: Blaming the 3-5-7 template is equally pointless. Whatever problems the 3-5-7 template system has are all just symptoms of the +2/-2 matchmaking. As long as the game is mixing in tanks from 3 different tiers in each battle there's going to be severe issues with balance. The template system was added to the game because players were raging that they were being completely useless every few battles when both teams had 7-8 tier 10 tanks while you were tier 8? You remember those super fun times when you had 3 tier 10 games in a row on your tier 8 tank and there was nothing you could do against the legion of tier 10 tanks? It wasn't fun either and I remember ragequitting lots of sessions because of that. Most people seem to have jumped into the 3-5-7 hatetrain and forgotten that the matchmaking was initially changed because people hated it.

The template system just re-packaged the core problem. The core problem is that we're having tier 8 tanks and tier 10 tanks in the same battles, or tier 5 and tier 7 tanks in the same battles. As long as that isn't being addressed nothing will save us. We can keep barking at the template system but as long as the game has +2/-2 matchmaking the "fixes" are going to be just re-packaging the problem. Remember that 3-5-7 template wouldn't even be possible in a +1/-1 environment.Lots of lower tier tanks fought

I guess that the forum ban have been lifted? You are so very wrong. Historically Pz IV and Tiger II fought side by side. +-2 mm is what makes WoT otherwise it would just be counterstrike in tanks.

I guess that the forum ban have been lifted? You are so very wrong. Historically Pz IV and Tiger II fought side by side. +-2 mm is what makes WoT otherwise it would just be counterstrike in tanks.

Yes, let's play the "historical" card so we can apply it in a very limited fashion to ignore the game balance. Historically battles weren't fought 15 vs. 15. Historically artillery hardly damaged tanks. Historically tanks didn't have hitpoints. Historically most high tier tanks didn't exist. Historically the Tiger I you bring up in your example wouldn't have been tier 7 and historically it wouldn't have its top gun. Actually historically there was no tier system. But let's forget about this historical stuff in general and just cherrypick one tiny "historical" detail to back up why the game should remain unbalanced. Sounds good to me. Great arguments there.

You're making it sound like it would be a bad thing to have balance in the game. I know right, WoT shouldn't be like Counter-Strike which is why it needs to be extremely broken in every area of the game. I think adding more RNG to the game, to let's say 75%, would further contribute to WoT being different from the other games so let's do that?

I also have no idea what forum bans you're talking about. Did I hurt someone by saying about the game solely catering for the needs of bots nowadays? I could imagine that hurting most of the player base, and the solution to make them less bots is to dumb down the game further. It would be a nightmare if balance was a thing and people had to learn the basic game mechanics.